Opinion
No. 1D17–3686
04-25-2018
Thomas R. BECNEL and DRB Development, LLC, Petitioners, v. AIZ HOLDINGS, LLC, Respondent.
Dana C. Matthews and John M. Stratton of Matthews & Jones, LLP, Destin, for Petitioners. Laurence J. Pino of Pino Nicolson, PLLC, Orlando; Stephen D. Milbrath and Tucker H. Byrd of Byrd Campbell, P.A., Winter Park, for Respondent.
Dana C. Matthews and John M. Stratton of Matthews & Jones, LLP, Destin, for Petitioners.
Laurence J. Pino of Pino Nicolson, PLLC, Orlando; Stephen D. Milbrath and Tucker H. Byrd of Byrd Campbell, P.A., Winter Park, for Respondent.
Per Curiam.
Petitioners, Thomas R. Becnel and DRB Development, LLC, seek certiorari review of an order granting a motion to compel discovery filed by Respondent, AIZ Holdings, LLC, and denying DRB's motion to quash. Because we agree with Respondent that Petitioners are unable to show irreparable harm, we dismiss the petition. See W. Fla. Reg'l Med. Ctr., Inc. v. See , 18 So.3d 676, 682 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (noting that a petitioner seeking certiorari review must demonstrate a departure from the essential requirements of the law resulting in irreparable harm that cannot be remedied on appeal and that the irreparable harm element must be addressed first because it is an issue of jurisdiction), aff'd , 79 So.3d 1 (Fla. 2012) ; see also Bd. of Trs. of the Internal Improvement Tr. Fund v. Am. Educ. Enters., LLC , 99 So.3d 450, 456 (Fla. 2012) (explaining that overbreadth in the context of discovery is not a sufficient basis for certiorari relief); Heekin v. Del Col , 60 So.3d 437, 438–39 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (noting that an order compelling production of relevant financial information cannot be the object of a writ of certiorari because there is no irreparable harm).
DISMISSED .
Lewis, Kelsey, and Winsor, JJ., concur.